|
Post by Chalupa! on Nov 17, 2004 10:25:03 GMT -8
This was reported in the news today: (In part)
WASHINGTON — Money from the United Nations Oil-for-Food program helped pay the families of Palestinian homicide bombers, the House Committee on International Relations is expected to reveal Wednesday during a hearing on corruption in the Iraqi relief program.
It has long been established that Saddam paid bounties of $15,000 to $25,000 to the Palestinian families of the murderers.
"In essence, the Hussein regime created a system of kickbacks, as we have heard today, skimming schemes and smuggling operations to bilk the international sanctions regime of all its potential value and profits," Juan Carlos Zarate, an assistant secretary at the Treasury Department, told lawmakers on Monday.
"He used the implements of the state, the Central Bank, commercial enterprises and his diplomatic and intelligence assets to help skirt international restrictions. In some cases, he used this system to attempt to procure weapons and other banned goods, all in an effort to fortify his regime," Zarate said.
In a different situation, Saddam also ran Corsin Financial Ltd., a front company whose money is now missing. Saddam presumably grabbed the money and used it to pay for his palaces, bolster his corrupt regime and go on a weapons-buying spree.
Does anyone still really think:
1. Sanctions were working? 2. Hussein didn't sponsor terrorism, so the war in Iraq is not a war on terror? 3. Hussein wasn't in violation of U.N. Resolutions? 4. We should care what the U.N. thinks, when they were themselves sponsoring terrorism, and are not cooperating in this investigation?
Now we see more and more why the U.N. was afraid of this war. They were afraid we would find out exactly what we are now finding out.
I'm interested to see what other peoples views are on this.....
Chalupa
|
|
|
Post by Chalupa! on Nov 19, 2004 8:50:37 GMT -8
I hate to double post, but I can't believe no one has anything to say about this. There must be as many different opinions as there are people on this board. Hello? !!!!!!!! Chalupa
|
|
|
Post by nsanesocrates on Nov 19, 2004 9:00:00 GMT -8
idk wut to sayD:
|
|
|
Post by jonathonkiler on Nov 19, 2004 9:01:26 GMT -8
Yeah, I'd say something about my opinion on the matter but I feel like crap today so maybe later.
|
|
|
Post by rabidgecko on Nov 19, 2004 15:41:04 GMT -8
Well, I dunno. I do believe that Saddam was evil and had to be removed from power, but I don't believe that this war on terror in Iraq is justly executed. There are other places where terrorism could be countered, perhaps to a greater effect as well. Also, if Bush is so very keen on this invasion of Iraq, he could possibly use more of the money put aside for the rebuilding of Iraq, because he has used only a portion of it. While I do agree that I am a tad bias against Bush and his Administration, I try to look at these from all angles, and the way I have seen it shows me that it is unjust.
rabid_gecko
|
|
|
Post by barneypwnz on Jan 16, 2005 12:09:43 GMT -8
I don't see the importance in this matter. So what? The U.N. is a secret terrorist helping organization. Who is really surprised? Saddam is a moron, so is Bin laden, and Yasser Arafat's death occurred. Does anybody know why everyone made such a big deal out of the death of Arafat? Okay, so any secret terrorist things he was doing are probably haulted for a while. We got Saddam, which really wasn't important at all since he never attacked the U.S. Bin Laden is the only threat we have now. The Iraqi war was a complete waste of time and money and lives. We made absolutely NO progress in that "country". We should have gone to Afghanistan instead because that's where the 9/11 plotter is. Or I'm not looking at this thing correctly.
Barney
|
|
|
Post by Chalupa! on Jan 16, 2005 13:05:48 GMT -8
Barney, We did go to Afghanistan! And Sadaam paid money to the families of anyone who would strap a bomb to themselves, walk into a public place like a disco, or whatever, and blow themselves up in Israel. Of course killing mass amounts of people, including anyone visiting that counrty (yes, including Americans). He also called on Muslims to attack us and I consider that an attack as well. If I raised pit bulls, trained them to kill and unleashed them out into the public where they killed people, would you let me continue releasing these pit bulls or would you stop me? Or would "I" not be the threat?
Chalupa
BTW, would you have been one of those guys who said "Why attack Germany? And then wait 8 years and wish you had attacked earlier?
|
|
|
Post by barneypwnz on Jan 17, 2005 20:28:30 GMT -8
Barney, We did go to Afghanistan! That's news to me. Guess I was too young or didn't watch the news alot when it happened. Could you tell me what year it was? Anyway, seeing that Osama is still running around with M16s and hiding in caves tells me that going into Afghanistan was a waste of time too. We should have stuck there until we got bin Laden. I hardly know anything about this. I shouldn't even start talking about going into Afghanistan. And I also apologize for saying that we didn't go there yet. And Sadaam paid money to the families of anyone who would strap a bomb to themselves, walk into a public place like a disco, or whatever, and blow themselves up in Israel. Of course killing mass amounts of people, including anyone visiting that counrty (yes, including Americans). That wasn't our problem. That was Israel's problem. It's a shame that some Americans were killed in some of those bombings, but it looks like it was accidental that they died. If an Iraqi traveled to Italy, and was caught in the crossfire of two mafia groups shooting at each other, that would be Italy's problem. Too bad for the Iraqi, but it wasn't directed at him/her. Note: Please nobody take any offense of the Italian example I used. I'm Italian myself, and am proud of it, so don't yell at me or send a hitman after me; I don't need it. He also called on Muslims to attack us and I consider that an attack as well. Maybe, but there are so many Muslim terrorists, and non-Muslim terrorists, where you get to the point that you ask, "why bother"? There are alot of different terrorist groups but I don't think we were ever attacked on by Saddam's guys. Maybe you meant "called" by attempting, but if so they were never carried out. If I raised pit bulls, trained them to kill and unleashed them out into the public where they killed people, would you let me continue releasing these pit bulls or would you stop me? Or would "I" not be the threat? Sure. I'd come over to your house and eat you alive. I would hardly blame your dogs, only because they were trained. You were the culprit. With Saddam, he only convinced his terrorist guys that we were bad, etc., and whoop-de-do, they attack us, that is if they DId attack us. See though, these are people, and people have a choice. That is why not every single last Muslim is attacking us. And that is why Americans are not bombing the Muslim world. Only the few morons who are moronic enough to allow themselves to be manipulated. Or maybe Saddam brainwashed them! Who really knows? BTW, would you have been one of those guys who said "Why attack Germany? And then wait 8 years and wish you had attacked earlier? Well... probably not. If you're referring to WW2 that is. Seeing that it was so obvious Hitler was going to try to take over the world would have probably sparked almost anyone's mind. Actually, I am almost certain that I wouldn't have been because Hitler was rapidly taking Europe, but what terrorist has actally taken territory? Seems to me like they just enjoy killing themselves and the "infidels". Did Saddam ever travel out of his coutry or declare war on anyone? Luckily, 8 years from now the entire world will be engaged in nuclear warfare. The End of the World!! Dun dun dun...But then again, I don't think there will be any country stupid enough to attack us for a long time - probably in the thousands of years. Really, just look at the facts. Native Americans (they had a reason but we still beat them). WWI - Kaiser Wilhelm (Didn't attack us just yet but he probably would have. WWII - Japan (suffered the most damage from us in the whole war, probably). And 9/11 - There haven't been any major attacks since \/\/00+! So there you have it. We have never lost a war. What could happen? Hopefully people are going to look at history and shoot themselves for even THINKING to attack us. I rest my case. Sort of. Barney
|
|
|
Post by Chalupa! on Jan 17, 2005 23:08:14 GMT -8
Did Saddam ever travel out of his coutry or declare war on anyone? Um, Yes. Kuwait , and he was massing troups outside Saudi Arabia after he took Kuwait. You need to read your history books! lol Chalupa
|
|
|
Post by barneypwnz on Jan 18, 2005 16:49:47 GMT -8
Who cares about those places?? Kuwait is such a small country it has to be conquered sooner or later. And I think we All know that he's not going to even Touch Saudi Arabia. And this idiotic saddam stuff is a little new - my history books are Old. Sorry! Barney
|
|
|
Post by Chalupa! on Jan 18, 2005 20:39:23 GMT -8
Who cares about those places?? Kuwait is such a small country it has to be conquered sooner or later. And I think we All know that he's not going to even Touch Saudi Arabia. lol, you are very ignorant! Sorry, but there is no other way to say it. I could explain all this to you, but I would be teaching you, and not debating. If you do some research, and argue valid points, I can respond. It feels like im teaching a young child here. Okay, maybe I should teach you a little bit, but try to learn the subject if you want to debate. Kuwait is a very, very rich country. The size of the country is not the issue. He had the third largest army in the world. He was going to continue taking over the middle east. Pretty much every single senator voted to authorize that war, and there was hardly anyone against it. It was obvious. He would have moved into Saudi Arabia so dont say everyone knows he wouldnt have. You seriously have no idea what your talking about, and I bet most people would agree on this one point! ;D Chalupa Reasons you are ignorant: 1. You didnt know we went to Afghanistan 2. You asked what year. We are still there. 3. You said we should have stayed looking for Osama. We are still there looking for him. He is most likely in Pakistan. 4. You did not know Saddam had ever attacked anyone 5. You said going to Afghanistan was a waste of time. But after we destroyed the Terrorist Training Camps, and kept Osama on the run, there has not been a terrorist attack on our Country. Quit while your behind.
|
|
|
Post by rabidgecko on Jan 18, 2005 20:43:31 GMT -8
Didn't Saddam also wage war on Iran to stop them from selling oil to the world market? Because I thought that Saddam also revived the age old feud between Iraq and Iran.
|
|
|
Post by Chalupa! on Jan 18, 2005 20:47:42 GMT -8
Didn't Saddam also wage war on Iran to stop them from selling oil to the world market? Because I thought that Saddam also revived the age old feud between Iraq and Iran. Yes. Of course, the USA helped him in that war....But for good reason. But you dont build the 3rd largest army in the world, while your Country suffers in poverty just to defend yourself. Chalupa
|
|
|
Post by barneypwnz on Jan 18, 2005 21:02:57 GMT -8
Hehehe.... I mentioned somewhere else in a different thread that I myself didn't even know why I was in the debate forum. This is exactly the reason why I never even bother debating people on Politics. I already know that I have no interest in what phonies attempt to lead our country, and therefore don't know my facts. Or, the other person is completely dumb and I am wasting my time (but still very rare when I meet the dumb one! ) So you're right. Debating on things I have no interest in is not for me. But before I get completely blown out of the sky, I just want to make one last thing - Reasons you are ignorant: 1. You didnt know we went to Afghanistan 2. You asked what year. We are still there. 3. You said we should have stayed looking for Osama. We are still there looking for him. He is most likely in Pakistan. 4. You did not know Saddam had ever attacked anyone 5. You said going to Afghanistan was a waste of time. But after we destroyed the Terrorist Training Camps, and kept Osama on the run, there has not been a terrorist attack on our Country. 1. Yep. 2. Kind of a redundent statement, seeing that you just said I didn't know we went there. 3. I thought he was still in Afghanistan. I didn't know we went there. I know we're still looking for him, I just thought that since you said we went there, and never mentioned leaving or staying, that we left, meaning giving up looking for him in Afghanistan. 4. Yep. 5. True, but only because I had just learned we went there, we did not catch Osama, and I didn't know of the training camps. Since it is such a current event, I should have caught that. I agree with you. But some of your reasons are redundent to each other. And, do these things make me ignorant, or was I not paying attention, or is it that I just don't care¿<br><br> It feels like im teaching a young child here. Okay, maybe I should teach you a little bit, but try to learn the subject if you want to debate. Actually, you are, and I appreciate it. Yeah, good idea. Thanks for the info though. I'll remember for future references. Barney
|
|
|
Post by Chalupa! on Jan 18, 2005 21:43:34 GMT -8
;D ;D ;DBarney-
You entered the debate board. And you were correct on one thing! (Yeah, when you said you shouldnt post here because you didnt know) lol.
No harm done. It was fun playing with ya.
Chalupa
|
|